Altibox Norway Chess 2017 will took place in Stavanger from June 5-17. With an average rating just shy of 2800, this was one of the strongest tournaments in recent memory. The winner, by a full point, was ... [more]

Yes, the mumbo jumbo will continue as long as I wish it to continue. And there is nothing you can do about it. So there is no need for you to wait and see., unless you have nothing better to do. And you clearly don't.

And, BTW, there is no right or wrong. But you obviously didn't understand that either.

Rama: I estimate TPR by asking: What rating would neither gain nor lose points with my given result? The formula 16(W-L) 4% (R*-R) can then be solved for R*, the rating which balances the equation. (That is the USCF formula as I remember it from the 80's)

activechess55: Aronian has been terrific form this year. His play reminded his fans of the Aronian of the old. One of the trademarks of his play is the lusty finishing which was in ample evidence during this event. Congrats Aronian!

He was among the leaders, in early phases, in the candidates for the past few cycles. Unfortunately, towards the end he ran out of steam. I don't think, he is a choker. Could be exhaustion issues. Considering that candidates happens to be a long event, it wouldn't be a surprise at all.

Whatever may the reason, I do wish Aronian qualifies as challenger. If he continues his fine form into the 2018's, a keen tussle for world title would be on cards.

AylerKupp: <<Rama> The formula 16(W-L) 4% (R*-R) can then be solved for R*, the rating which balances the equation.>

Thanks, I did know this one which I recognized after solving for R*. This is the (somewhat) well known "algorithm of 400" which is used by some organizations and was probably used by the USCF in the 1980s. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elo_r.... It can be expressed as:

* If you win a game, your TPR will be the opponent's rating + 400

* If you lose a game, your TPR will be the opponent's rating - 400

* If you draw a game, your TPR will be the opponent's rating.

This equates to:

R* = RA + 400(W – L) / N, where:

R* = Performance rating
RA = Average of opponents ratings
W = Number of wins
L = Number of losses
N = Number of games played

In your formula I think that it should be –4%(R*-R) instead of 4%(R*-R) (because that makes it come out right), and 16(W-L) should be divided by N. Other than that, your memory is pretty good!

And for comparison, here is how "my" method (1st column) compares with yours (2nd column) and the difference (3rd column) after round 8:

Anand, Viswanathan <2749><2748><+1>

Aronian, Levon <2935><2948><-13>

Carlsen, Magnus <2749><2743><+6>

Caruana, Fabiano <2752><2746><+6>

Giri, Anish <2843><2850><-7>

Karjakin, Sergei <2707><2699><+8>

Kramnik, Vladimir <2799><2796><+3>

Nakamura, Hikaru <2888><2899><-11>

So, Wesley <2796><2796><0>

Vachier-Lagrave, Maxime <2754><2747><+7>

Pretty close. And, again, since TPR is a hypothetical number, there is no way determine which value, if any, is the correct value since it can't be measured.

AylerKupp: <<john barleycorn> It is a long event for every participant>

Yes it a long event with a lot of stress given the importance of the outcome. But remember that in the past the Candidates Tournament was often twice or near twice the current number of 14 games. And in those days they had adjournments instead of continuing to play with increments, although I wouldn't know which is more grueling, adjournments (with help) on their days off or continuing to play until the game is over. And today's prize fund is so much larger than in the past so I'm sure that increases the stress in today's tournament.

BOSTER: <John barleycorn>:< It's a long event for every participant>.
Time increment was invented by Fischer because chess world has problem with mechanical clock.
But now, when we have digital clock, increment gives an advantage to players who are better in blitz even when we play classical games.
So, I'd say that increment should be forbidden.

crwynn: Aronian's victory must be among the more impressive tournament performances in the game's history. To come in ahead of the world champion, his predecessor and at least 2 serious title contenders, a full point ahead of a field with absolutely no weak spots...that is amazing.

AylerKupp: <<crwynn> According to this site anyway, the lowest-rated of Aronian's 9 opponents was Sergey Karjakin at 2781.>

Yes, you are right. And according to this and other sites the lowest rated opponent of each of the players in this tournament was also Karjakin. Coincidence? I think not. But I could be wrong.

And, of course, this "fish" recently competed for the WCC title after winning the Candidates tournament, and held the defending world champion to a draw in the classical time control portion of the match. If this is a "fish", then I would love to be able to swim with the fishes. Alas, when I try, I sink like a stone. So sad.

Sorry, if I gave the impression that it’s a long event for Aronian only. My original intention was to suggest brain fatigue as a possible cause. So that I could offer some (unsolicited) advice to avoid the same!

How does one avoid brain fatigue?
1. By improving oxygenation: Poor oxygenation is one of the causes. Poor oxygenation is in turn caused by deficit of salts like zinc and iron or Vitamin B12/B6. This problem can be addressed by loading the diet with these supplements.

2. By ensuring adequate blood sugar levels.
3. By ensuring adequate stimulation: Of course, this cause is dismissed, out of hands, for a chess player. Modern chess exercises brain to such an extent that inadequate stimulation is ruled out altogether.

I was about to offer above-mentioned prescription. But I stopped short! First, I realized that I am an ordinary kibitzer and him a super-GM! I realized, moreover, that he won two super-GM events in recent times!

After reading my latest post, one might say, I offered the advice anyway!

The status of super-GM doesn’t make a chess player immune from unsolicited advice, however. Considering his tournament standing, Karjakin could get unsolicited advice. In fact, he might get a bagful of them. And poor Karjakin is in no position to protest. My heart goes out to him.

BOSTER: <crwynn>:<Aronian's victory must be
among the more impressive tour performannce>. I don't want to undermine Aronian's great performance, but I don't think that this tour as a whole
represents a step forward in the development of chess creativity like
St.Petersburg 1914, or Zurich 1953.

visayanbraindoctor: <frogbert: here's my point of view: there really is no objective way to tell whether the fact that there were only 2-3 guys at any point in time that were close to Kasparov at the same time, while there are 10 guys that are close to Carlsen now (at the same time) means that a) Kasparov (and Karpov) were better, or b) there are more exceptionally strong players around now. Your interpretation used to be - and seemingly still is - a), while mine is b).>

Quite right <frogbert>.

I think it's obvious why you choose (b).

My choice of (a) is influenced by the fact that I grew up in the Karpov era. I saw him win tournament after tournament playing a kind of chess that I thought could never be beaten (until Kasparov came along). Karpov I believe never self-destructed from his rise up the Interzonals and the Candidates until his failure against GKK, while now and then we see Carlsen turn out a forgettable performance (as in the Olympiads) or one that occasionally even lands him near the bottom of the tournament table. IMO Carlsen does not have the aura of invincibility that Karpov, and later Kasparov had. I also happen to think while going through their games that although all three play chess in the same upper tier, the two K's were just a tad better.

(This may yet change if Carlsen picks it up and plays consistently as well as he did in 2013 to 2014 for the next 10 years.)

(BTW I am no Kasparov fan. I hate his politics in and out of chess. I have to admit though that he is the most brilliant attacker humanity has ever produced.)

Fischer I believe was well within the level of the two K's. Had he continued playing chess, the 1980s might well have been the strongest era in chess history, with an 'old' but still strong Fischer, a Karpov just past his prime, and a surging Kasparov playing in the same tournaments together. As it is, a waning Karpov managed to play well enough until the 1990s, just in time to to contend with the rising Anand, Kramnik, Ivanchuk, Shirov, Kamsky, Gelfand, Topalov, Svidler, etc.. while GKK was still in his prime. That makes the 1990s IMO the strongest era in chess history ever.

Many kibitzers will probably find this strange but IMO the 1913 to 1925 period might arguably challenge the 1990s for the title of strongest era ever. It was a time that Lasker, Capablanca, and Alekhine were all playing superb and tremendously strong chess; Rubinstein was still playing strongly, and Nimzovitch, Bogolyubov, Reti, Tartakover, Spielmann, etc.. were rising. If the present top 10 generation happened to be born in the 1890s (assume they would know the openings current for that time and would have to use the pen and paper method in doing opening research), only Carlsen IMO would have had a decent chance of winning against the LCA trio in a World Championship match, and even he would find it difficult to win a tournament such as this St Petersburg (1914).

Unfortunately this era coincided with WW1, which must have affected all chess events and players for the worst.

These are just my opinions of course, which as I have said I expect to get flaked for. I respect your thoughts above, and thank you for giving them.

tamar: The Fifties was another incredible strong era. You had Botvinnik, Keres, Smyslov and Bronstein already established, to be joined by Geller, Petrosian, Stein (although he did not emerge right away), Polugaevsky, Taimanov, Spassky, Tal, Fischer, and Larsen. {Probably have forgotten some)

That is the period that most reminds me of the Nineties, when it seemed that Anand, Topalov, Ivanchuk, Kamsky, or Kramnik were poised to overtake Kasparov and Karpov but then fade as another rival got hot, and became the new hope.

Edgar Allan Poe described the huge whirlpool off the coast of Norway which you have found yourself in, and which will soon take you and what remains of the Altibox into the center of the earth.
http://xroads.virginia.edu/~hyper/p...

NOTE: You need to pick a username and password to post a reply.
Getting your account takes less than a minute, totally anonymous,
and 100% free--plus, it
entitles you to features otherwise unavailable.
Pick your username now and join the chessgames community!
If you already have an account, you should
login now.

Please observe our posting guidelines:

No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.

No spamming, advertising, or duplicating posts.

No personal attacks against other members.

Nothing in violation of United States law.

No posting personal information of members.

See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform an administrator.

NOTE: Keep all discussion on the topic of this page.
This forum is for this specific tournament and nothing else. If you want to discuss chess in general, or
this site, you might try the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages
posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.